The Honourable Sinclair Stevens, formerly Minister of Regional Economic Expansion in Mulroney’s Progressive Conservative government in the ‘80’s and currently Leader of the Progressive Canadian Party today stated, “I am very pleased to see the support given to progressive governance in recent articles in two major Canadian newspapers.” In an October 10 article endorsing Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party for next Monday’s election the Toronto Star said,“ … Stephen Harper has offered voters simply more of the same – more regressive social policies, more whittling away at government, more settling for a stagnant economy that leaves too many behind. “Canadians are a decent, progressive people who deserve a decent, progressive government that holds out the prospect of a better and more constructive future.” and also “We believe voters who refuse to accept this backward-looking, destructive agenda (and polls suggest that’s about two-thirds of them) should give their support to Trudeau and the Liberals. They offer the strongest progressive alternative to the Conservatives and are best-positioned to win enough support to form a new government.” And on October 13 the Globe and Mail wrote: “Justin Trudeau is targeting Conservative voters as he tours through Ontario in the last week of the campaign, arguing Stephen Harper has abandoned the “progressive” heritage of his Tory predecessors.”; and also, “The Liberal Leader said that in the past, PC governments fought against poverty and helped to improve Canada’s reputation on the world stage. “Those are values that haven’t disappeared, they have just disappeared from the current Conservative Party and disappeared along with anything progressive about them,” and, in a final quote from Trudeau’s statement, “We don’t need to convince them to leave the Conservative Party, we just need to show them how Stephen Harper’s party has left them.” Stevens concluded with, “It is to be hoped that, on election day, the voters will have taken note of the above and Harper’s very non-progressive party, together with its dictatorial leader, will be reduced to a minority in our Canadian parliament.”

What “progressive” means to Progressive Conservatives, Progressive Canadian candidate, South Surrey-White Rock.

Sunday, 18 October 2015 17:31

What “progressive” means to Progressive Conservatives, Progressive Canadian candidate, South Surrey-White Rock.

For Immediate Release:

October 17, 2015, South Surrey, BC - South Surrey-White Rock Progressive Canadian candidate Brian Marlatt said today in the hotly contested BC riding that it is important to understand what is meant by progressive, as a Tory understands the word and Sir John A. Macdonald would have intended.

“In 1867, Benjamin Disraeli defined progressive as Sir John A. would have understood it. 'In a progressive country change is a constant; and the great question is, not whether you should resist change which is inevitable, but whether that change should be carried out in deference to the manners, the customs, the laws and the traditions of the people, or in deference to abstract principles and arbitrary and general doctrines.’

Today we have parties which call themselves progressive but who are really about abstract principles and ideology, and parties that call themselves conservative who are neoliberal, neoconservative, libertarian and corrupt.

Progressive Canadians are Progressive Conservatives; Progressive Conservatives are Progressive Canadians. Mr. Harper’s party is not and wilfully choses not to be progressive conservative.

A young John A. Macdonald in 1854 defined his intention to create a genuine Tory party, as “progressive Conservative” and why :

" … our aim..[he said] should be to enlarge the bounds of our party so as to embrace every person desirous of being counted as a “progressive Conservative”, and who will join in a series of measures to put an end to the corruption which has ruined the present government and debauched all its followers."

”Sir John A. Macdonald defined the choices for Canadians in the 2015 election,” the PC Party candidate in South Surrey-White Rock said.

October 15, 2015 South Surrey, BC - "The Senate emerged as an important issue early in this election because of the Duffy trial and the Harper Senate scandal," Progressive Canadian candidate Brian Marlatt said this morning in the hotly contested key BC riding South Surrey-White Rock where Harper Conservative candidate Dianne Watts is described as a falling star.

"The Senate dominated the first half of the 2015 federal election, not surprisingly, because of the Duffy trial, involvement by Harper's chiefs-of-staff, and more subtly but most significantly because of Stephen Harper's proposals to rewrite Canada's constitution through Senate reform by neglect or confrontation, in defiance of the Supreme Court of Canada reference on Senate reform, as most Canadians will understand the court's intention."

"Progressive Canadians believe it presents an opportunity for meaningful change within the constitution", Marlatt said.

"What was revealed or alleged in the Duffy trial is really less important than Harper's stratagem to create a false choice between abolition, perhaps by neglect of the prime minister's duty to nominate new senators to the Governor General when others retire, like South Surrey's Senator Gerry St. Germain who retired in 2012, and provincial election of senators pretending to be reform. Harper wants to replace Canadian federalism framed around a vision of one Canada from to sea to sea with province-first federalism. Harper's objective is to create a provincially elected Senate to build firewalls around the provinces against Canadian national policies and national programmes", Marlatt believes.

"Failing that," he suggests, "Harper is willing to threaten abolition by neglect to win favour for his firewall proposal as the alternative." A federal court case brought forward against the Harper government by Vancouver lawyer Aniz Alani directly challenges Stephen Harper's refusal to name senators as neglect of the prime minister's constitutional responsibilities."

The Progressive Canadian Party proposal for Senate Reform addresses the issues of patronage, partisanship, and the threat to national unity inherent in provincial election of Senators to Canada's Parliament, says Brian Marlatt the PC Party candidate in South Surrey-White Rock.

"The Senate is a check on the prime minister and cabinet government and on excesses of electoral partisanship and provincial sectarianism, as intended at Confederation. It balances representation by population in the elected Commons with regional representation in the appointed Senate to review and revise government legislation and regulations, what is meant by "sober second thought". It does not exist to build firewalls against Ottawa as Mr. Harper has described it or to serve the government's agenda as Mr. Harper believes. Mr. Harper is the first prime minister ever to accept pledges from senators he names to pass his party's legislation."

"Progressive Canadians propose that future nomination of senate candidates to the Governor General should come from the non-partisan Queen's Privy Council, instead of from the Prime Minister alone", Marlatt said.

"The Queen's Privy Council exists within the constitution to advise the GG as the Queen's representative but is rarely used. It consists of all present and former prime ministers and cabinets, former Supreme Court justices, diplomats, other distinguished Canadians, and leaders of the Opposition or premiers on invitation. Patronage, partisanship, potential provincial sectarianism, and unconstitutional abolition are avoided. Excellence, merit, and knowledge of governance, service, become the standard in appointment without the partisanship of election."

"What we, in South Surrey-White Rock, should not miss is how intimately this involves our own riding", he added. "The Progressive Conservative Guiding Principles for Senate Reform were written here as Tory policy by Progressive Conservatives in South Surrey-White Rock before the party takeover and are the basis of the Progressive Canadian proposal for Senate appointment, free of partisan patronage, through nomination by the Queen's Privy Council."

Why has Canada not taken the lead as an alternative to the Trans-Pacific Partnership by championing a deal within the 53 nation Commonwealth that would be twice the size of the Trans-Pacific Partnership? We could have been actively trading with the other 52 nations well before this. This would have given us a much bigger advantage, globally, when it came time to sign a deal like the Trans-Pacific Partnership where there are only 6 Commonwealth nations, namely:Australia, New Zealand, Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, and Canada.

Fact is, Stephen Harper is a follower, not a leader.

Canada need not be in the shadow of other countries. If Stephen Harper had shown initiative, we would currently be enjoying the advantage of dealing with 2.3 billion people in the Commonwealth, as opposed to a mere 800 million in the TPP. With the signing of the TPP, Canada only has a meagre 5% of the action.

A Commonwealth deal would give us a great deal more of the action. Canada is the best situated country in the world, with its free trade agreement with the U.S.A. and Mexico, and its membership in the 53 member Commonwealth of Nations which has over 2.3 billion people.

English is a language which is used and followed across the Commonwealth countries. Most of the local laws are derived from British law. These countries, therefore, are natural markets for co-operation. Emerging economies such as India, South Africa, Malaysia, Kenya, Nigeria, Brunei, Pakistan and Bangladesh are also in the Commonwealth.

Dealing with Commonwealth countries would give Canadian companies far greater access to the countries that account for over 40 percent of World Trade Organization(WTO) membership, and a combined GDP of over $10 trillion. There is over $3 trillion of trade between Commonwealth countries every year. Fifty percent of the Commonwealth countries export more than 25 percent of their total exports to other members, presenting an inherent strength in doing business together.

The Commonwealth charter ensures that Commonwealth countries have a common framework of values that include promotion of good governance, the rule of law, and free trade - among others. This gives us an excellent framework for doing business.

Commonwealth countries such as Australia, the U.K., New Zealand, Malaysia, Singapore and Canada were in the top 10 countries listed for ease in incorporating a new company and who live without unnecessary rules and regulations.

It is time for a greater vision and a much broader scope which would mean a much stronger future for Canada, a Canada that can be a world leader in innovation and initiative.